ArticleNutrition & metabolism2026
Work-to-sleep ratio as a novel marker of NAFLD risk: evidence from U.S. and Korean national cohorts.
Article in Nutrition & metabolism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), now redefined as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), affects 25-30% of adults globally and is driven by metabolic dysregulation. Concurrently, prolonged work hours and insufficient sleep are increasingly prevalent, yet their combined relationship with NAFLD risk remains unexplored. The Work-to-Sleep Ratio (WSR), quantifying the balance between occupational time and sleep recovery, may serve as a novel behavioral marker of NAFLD risk. Unlike work hours or sleep duration alone, WSR integrates these two interdependent behaviors into a single metric, capturing the balance between occupational demand and physiological recovery.
methodsThis cross-sectional study utilized nationally representative data from the U.S. NHANES (2017-2023; n = 3,935) and Korean KNHANES (2019-2020 and 2022-2023; n = 10,729) cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression models with sequential covariate adjustment were employed to examine WSR-NAFLD associations. Restricted cubic spline analyses explored nonlinear relationships, while mediation analyses examined the potential involvement of adiposity (BMI), inflammation (CRP), and dyslipidemia (NHHR). Subgroup analyses assessed effect modification by demographic and clinical factors.
resultsWSR exhibited nonlinear associations with NAFLD risk in both cohorts. In NHANES, NAFLD risk increased with rising WSR and attenuated at higher levels. In contrast, in KNHANES, higher WSR was associated with progressively increased NAFLD risk that plateaued at elevated ratios. Associations were stronger and more consistent in KNHANES (fully adjusted OR per unit increase in WSR 1.57, 95% CI 1.38-1.78). Subgroup analyses revealed stronger associations in younger adults and metabolically vulnerable groups. Mediation analyses identified adiposity (BMI) as accounting for the largest proportion of the observed WSR-NAFLD association, with secondary roles for inflammation (CRP) and dyslipidemia (NHHR).
conclusionWSR may serve as a useful behavior-based marker associated with NAFLD in nationally representative U.S. and Korean cohorts, with associations most evident among younger adults. Adiposity appeared to play a central role in this association, with additional contributions from inflammation and dyslipidemia. These findings highlight WSR as a simple time-based indicator for identifying populations at elevated NAFLD risk. Longitudinal studies are needed to confirm these associations and clarify temporal relationships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.